Tagging alt/farmed accounts when they are making loan repayments

[Satofan44]

We should not create ways through which scammers of various sorts can protect themselves during their malicious activities. Not tagging them is a mistake, and it creates a vulnerability that is easily exploited -- it is already being exploited.

[Shishir99]

I felt bad when Pakhitheboss got tagged, and some people told me I should have exposed him later. That guy threatened me multiple times, and he said he would come back and explain everything. Unfortunately, he never returned and did not repay the loan. So, I felt like I should not let the lender know before I have created the thread. However, it seems the majority do not agree with this point of view. Now I feel better knowing that I didn't do anything wrong at that time. 

[JollyGood]

If an environment is created that allows or encourages multiple account owners to take loans and then feel they will not receive any tags if nefarious conduct has been connected to their accounts, then the community has failed in keeping each other safe.

Keeping that aside, unfortunately, some of the accounts that have received loans have received tags from reputable members therefore trying to understand why they would accept the loan request is in itself a mystery.

We should not create ways through which scammers of various sorts can protect themselves during their malicious activities. Not tagging them is a mistake, and it creates a vulnerability that is easily exploited -- it is already being exploited.

[AakZaki]

I often say when it comes to finding a connected account and not written in a separate thread it will be a bit of a concern.

Let's look at this once again, since this is a connected account and one of them has a loan to shasan.
I think this is part of building positive trust through loans, often I find that connected accounts always make loans to get positive trust.

What do you all think about this

In the Thread I created

Solokan and Kaliandra are connected accounts that cheated on Bounty, the allegations are here

then his Ahli38 account is also connected to Solokan, isn't this a farm account?

I will bring another name in my new find, namely the account name "Ahli38"

Wallet = 0xf3fbeC11839205071B29c8d22D624137189d5853
Sent to
Ahli38 = 0x349cAE00fc9d156f9e52944e4611b4d8A318B25f

https://bscscan.com/tx/0xc7bfa898a6682b1d2034721f1d14cb2dc429c99db57a3a2d462e46dda20cb41d

Wallet = 0xf3fbeC11839205071B29c8d22D624137189d5853
Sent to
Indodax Deposit = 0x4519B77F9D8cD16383B9B51B193f7792538eC1B4

https://bscscan.com/tx/0x4581dc996fdeb1806c479758c3fedfba01ab3779d884774a076edcb0f0f79da4

Solokan = 0x16C37d29964342C51c870c90e13632159870d365
Sent to
Indodax Deposit = 0x4519B77F9D8cD16383B9B51B193f7792538eC1B4

https://polygonscan.com/tx/0x8037e3dc8036f62ccc68138e069a8998279b3fa9be0c91600803176ebfdf01e5

[Awaklara]

Let's look at this once again, since this is a connected account and one of them has a loan to shasan.
I think this is part of building positive trust through loans, often I find that connected accounts always make loans to get positive trust.

Let's first put aside the case of abuse; accounts that receive positive feedback from transactions and loans that are well repaid are legitimate in my opinion. There is no problem with that. 
What could become a problem might be when several connected accounts take loans simultaneously from one lender. When these connected accounts are eventually caught for abusing campaigns or other things, the risk is default on all loans. 

Even without abuse, connected accounts that are published should be tagged neutrally. 
Tags will help campaign managers select participants. Likewise, lenders will only grant loans to one account.

But if we find accounts that commit abuse, even if they have loans, with valid evidence, those accounts deserve to be given a negative tag.

[JollyGood]

The poll will be ongoing but it is already proving to be quite conclusive. There have been 20 votes in total and 16 (80%) have decided alt-accounts and farmed accounts that are making loan repayments should be tagged. Only 4 votes (20%) have decided they should not be tagged.

Overall, I think probably the vast majority of members would like to see appropriate feedback and tags given to accounts regardless of whether they use the feedback as an excuse to default on loans. Just because a lender might lose money, it cannot be a valid reason to stop accounts receiving appropriate feedback.

[knowngunman]

This forum can be so myopic at times.  Getting paid to post isn't the only way to earn money, and being in a signature campaign isn't a requirement to pay beck your debts.  Of course there are people on LoyceV's weekly list who have red-tags who I would trust with thousands of dollars, campaign or not.

If some account is involved in nefarious activity, the person witnessing and exposing that activity has an obligation to the entire community, not just one person among us.  Lending is risky business, and shouldn't be taken lightly.  If one of us chooses to take that risk, the blame for not thoroughly vetting the borrowers is his and his alone.

Obviously, this ought to be the norm but unfortunately the lenders here seem to ignore the vetting part completely. I have seen cases of accounts with disturbing neutral tag yet they applied for loan and get approval. This prove the lender only care about the future interest to the extent of putting their capital at risk. Accounts with disturbing neutral tag are likely to receive negative tag sooner or later if further investigation is carried out. Lenders should be aware of this but since they choose to turn blind eye, then they should accept the consequences.

After all, negative tags or being removed from campaign should not stop them from paying if they are willing to pay back. I suppose everyone taking loan has other means of paying back the loan and not completely rely on signature campaign. Or does it mean loans can not be automatically paid once campaign ends? Or they keep extending until they find new campaign? And what happens if they can not find another campaign? Default automatically? If signature campaign is the only hope paying back the loan is tied to, I don't think the lender is aware of the severity of risk he's into.

We all want a sane community free from cheaters. The community is trying to be lenient so lenders can recover their money but from all indication this leniency is already being abused and taken advantage of. Continuing on the path of using loan as excuse to call out cheater translate to endorsement/promotion of system abuse.

[KWH]

The poll will be ongoing but it is already proving to be quite conclusive. There have been 20 votes in total and 16 (80%) have decided alt-accounts and farmed accounts that are making loan repayments should be tagged. Only 4 votes (20%) have decided they should not be tagged.

Overall, I think probably the vast majority of members would like to see appropriate feedback and tags given to accounts regardless of whether they use the feedback as an excuse to default on loans. Just because a lender might lose money, it cannot be a valid reason to stop accounts receiving appropriate feedback.

Lenders losing money is the risk lenders take. It is up to the lender to secure adequate collateral to cover the loan in case of default. It is not up to the community to make sure the loan is repaid. Accurate feedback, however, is required.

[DireWolfM14]

It is up to the lender to secure adequate collateral to cover the loan in case of default.

If lenders insist on collateral they'll get very few, if any borrowers.  Unsecured loans have become the norm, and there's no putting the genie back in the bottle.  But there's no one to blame for that other than the lenders. 

Right now, the only active lender is Shasan.  If he wanted to change that, he could.  However, if he did, the result would be very few loans being issued.  One of the reasons Shasan is able to charge the rates he does is because of the risk he assumes.  No risk means far fewer opportunities to earn, and far less profit from those fewer opportunities.

This is business 101, in plain and simple terms, and we have no authority to force anyone to conduct business a certain way.  That being said, the risk taken by lenders is well known and his burden to bear.

[Zoomic]

The poll will be ongoing but it is already proving to be quite conclusive. There have been 20 votes in total and 16 (80%) have decided alt-accounts and farmed accounts that are making loan repayments should be tagged. Only 4 votes (20%) have decided they should not be tagged.

Overall, I think probably the vast majority of members would like to see appropriate feedback and tags given to accounts regardless of whether they use the feedback as an excuse to default on loans. Just because a lender might lose money, it cannot be a valid reason to stop accounts receiving appropriate feedback.

I voted yes!
Loan should not be an escape route for punishment, else the victims will keep extending their loans and be enjoying the preferential treatment.

However, I do not support tagging people for flimsy reasons not relating to scam or possibility of someone getting scammed by the user.

We know too well that the forum accounts have been serving as a kind of collateral for members to take loans. No lender will issue a loan to an account with a red tag. So, during the loan period, a tag should be issued only when it is necessary or might affect the community if not given. We shouldn't also forget that in this forum, issues are treated case by case. So, there might not be a general/standard rule as regard this topic.